public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
To: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>
Cc: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>,
	Yu-cheng Yu <yu-cheng.yu@intel.com>,
	binutils@sourceware.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: ELF NT_GNU_PROPERTY_TYPE_0 Questions
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 13:12:53 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87k1b5xxl6.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190822110049.GE27757@arm.com> (Dave Martin's message of "Thu, 22 Aug 2019 12:00:50 +0100")

* Dave Martin:

> Hi there,
>
> Can you clarify a couple of points about the SysV ABI Linux
> Extensions [1] for me?
>
> 1) Can there be more than one NT_GNU_PROPERTY_TYPE_0 note in a valid
> ELF file?  I think the answer should be "no".

Yes, if it has been produced by a link editors which does not about
property notes.  The ELF file still needs to be treated as valid, but
the note should be ignored.

> 2) Is is permissible for an ELF ET_EXEC or ET_DYN file that contains
> an NT_GNU_PROPERTY_TYPE_0 property not to have a PT_GNU_PROPERTY phdrs
> entry mapping it?  Except for historical usage by RedHat (which
> apparently can be worked round in userspace) it seems reasonable for
> the answer to be "no", at least for Linux.

Using an older link editor on a CET-enabled distribution will produce
such binaries, too.  The ELF file still needs to be treated as valid,
but the property date should be ignored.

> 3) Is it permissible for the PT_GNU_PROPERTY phdr (if present) to
> map anything other than precisely one NT_GNU_PROPERTY_TYPE_0
> note?  I think the answer should be "no".

Correct.  Additional processing logic in the link editor is needed.

> 4) Is an NT_GNU_PROPERTY_TYPE_0 note allowed to contain two or more
> properties with the same pr_type?  I think the answer should be "no".

H.J. needs to answer that.

> 5) What's the rationale for sorting the properties by pr_type?  I can
> see this would make it easier for the linker to merge
> NT_GNU_PROPERTY_TYPE_0 notes from different files, but I'm wondering
> whether the kernel really needs to enforce the ordering when loading
> an ELF.  The kernel doesn't need to merge property lists together.

Likewise.

> 6) Do you have a view on the best way to define the Elf_Prop type in
> headers?  bfd elf-bfd.h seems to have elf_property, but this doesn't
> follow the style of the public ELF headers.

We should put it into <elf.h> in glibc.  We don't want to rely on UAPI
headers there because this version of <elf.h> is used in many places.

Thanks,
Florian

      reply	other threads:[~2019-08-22 11:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-08-22 11:00 ELF NT_GNU_PROPERTY_TYPE_0 Questions Dave Martin
2019-08-22 11:12 ` Florian Weimer [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=87k1b5xxl6.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com \
    --to=fweimer@redhat.com \
    --cc=Dave.Martin@arm.com \
    --cc=binutils@sourceware.org \
    --cc=hjl.tools@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=yu-cheng.yu@intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox